Liberal Forum
Archive
‹
Political Chat Rooms
‹
No Holds Barred Political Forum
‹
California scientist says he ‘left out the full truth’ to get climate change wildfire study published
California scientist says he ‘left out the full truth’ to get climate change wildfire study published
By Beekeeper
9 Sep 2023 6:14 am in No Holds Barred Political Forum
9 Sep 2023 6:52 am
Pastafarian » 09 Sep 2023, 6:48 am » wrote: ↑ It’s north that I dive like it. It’s that you MAG(G)Ats lie like patriots breath.
Fake news was Trump’s favorite line. I want a piece of that action as well.
too many pieces of action is why you have aids
9 Sep 2023 6:52 am
Yup. Russian disinformation helped by Giuliani’s corrupt handling of the laptop.
9 Sep 2023 6:53 am
Pastafarian » 09 Sep 2023, 6:52 am » wrote: ↑ Yup. Russian disinformation helped by Giuliani’s corrupt handling of the laptop.
did you get the help?
1 800-aids-help
9 Sep 2023 6:55 am
Pastafarian » 09 Sep 2023, 6:52 am » wrote: ↑ Yup. Russian disinformation helped by Giuliani’s corrupt handling of the laptop.
I didn’t think there was anybody left clinging to that nonsense. Hell, even Hunter doesn’t believe that…and he was high as a kite for most of his time with the device. 
9 Sep 2023 7:20 am
Psssst. SAMBO, the FBI had the ACTUAL LAPTOP before anyone ELSE had a copy of the HARD DRIVE!!Pastafarian » 09 Sep 2023, 6:52 am » wrote: ↑ Yup. Russian disinformation helped by Giuliani’s corrupt handling of the laptop.
Including Giuliani!!
And this "scientist" himself is the one BLOWING THE WHISTLE on how "climate papers" are MANIPULATED IN ORDER TO MEET THE DEMANDS OF THESE PUBLISHERS!! Sucks you are too **** STUPID to comprehend that simple FACT, KNEEGROW!!
9 Sep 2023 7:23 am
Large corporations that individual taxpayers subsidize like an old world feudal lord create pollution and blame any problems on the citizen who only purchase the product or service at a high inflation price. The position of the sun controls the earths temperature and the creator controls the position of the sun, not a human corporation commune.Beekeeper » 09 Sep 2023, 6:14 am » wrote: ↑ So an ADMISSION of LIES by these alleged "climate scientists" to get PUBLISHED and that leads to $$ from the LWNJs to stuff into their POCKETS for the PREDETERMINED OUTCOME IN MORE PAPERS THEY WRITE!!
A California scientist admitted that he "left out the full truth" about climate change, blaming it primarily on human causes, to get his study published in a prestigious science journal.
Patrick T. Brown, a lecturer at Johns Hopkins University and doctor of earth and climate sciences, admitted in an online article in The Free Press, a blog post and a series of social media posts that he distorted the findings of his studies to appeal to the editors at Nature and Science magazines, which are prestigious online science journals.
"And the editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society," Brown wrote in The Free Press.
Patrick T. Brown's study published in Nature magazine on Aug. 30 stated that climate change affected extreme wildfire behavior like the devastating fires in California and Maui. (AP Photo/Eric Thayer)
Brown's study published in Nature on Aug. 30 stated that climate change affected extreme wildfire behavior like the devastating fires in California and Maui. The established scientist now admits that he "focused narrowly" only on the human influence of wildfires, instead of focusing broadly on the complexities of other "obviously relevant factors."
He blamed his angle on the pressure scientists face to get their studies published in prestigious articles and the need to create catchy abstracts that can be turned into headlines.
9 Sep 2023 7:25 am
Stop whispering in my ear, you whispering ***.Beekeeper » 09 Sep 2023, 7:20 am » wrote: ↑ Psssst. SAMBO, the FBI had the ACTUAL LAPTOP before anyone ELSE had a copy of the HARD DRIVE!!
Including Giuliani!!
And this "scientist" himself is the one BLOWING THE WHISTLE on how "climate papers" are MANIPULATED IN ORDER TO MEET THE DEMANDS OF THESE PUBLISHERS!! Sucks you are too **** STUPID to comprehend that simple FACT, KNEEGROW!!
9 Sep 2023 7:53 am
I am a climate scientist. And while climate change is an important factor affecting wildfires over many parts of the world, it isn’t close to the only factor that deserves our sole focus.So why does the press focus so intently on climate change as the root cause? Perhaps for the same reasons I just did in an academic paper about wildfires in Nature, one of the world’s most prestigious journals: it fits a simple storyline that rewards the person telling it. The paper I just published—“Climate warming increases extreme daily wildfire growth risk in California”—focuses exclusively on how climate change has affected extreme wildfire behavior. I knew not to try to quantify key aspects other than climate change in my research because it would dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival, Science, want to tell. This matters because it is critically important for scientists to be published in high-profile journals; in many ways, they are the gatekeepers for career success in academia. And the editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society. To put it bluntly, climate science has become less about understanding the complexities of the world and more about serving as a kind of Cassandra, urgently warning the public about the dangers of climate change. However understandable this instinct may be, it distorts a great deal of climate science research, misinforms the public, and most importantly, makes practical solutions more difficult to achieve.Pastafarian » 09 Sep 2023, 6:27 am » wrote: ↑ I’m almost positive this is fake news.
you see, MAG(G)Ats cannot be taken seriously any longer.
This scientist is going to ruin his career and standing by fudging his study? Btw, was it a peer-reviewed study? Probably not either.
https://www.thefp.com/p/i-overhyped-cli ... -published
This scientist explains why climate scientists need to lie to get published ......
Idiot ...
now read the original article above .....
before making a fool out of your self again......
9 Sep 2023 7:59 am
No one ever said it was the only factor. But it is a factor.Majik » 09 Sep 2023, 7:53 am » wrote: ↑ I am a climate scientist. And while climate change is an important factor affecting wildfires over many parts of the world, it isn’t close to the only factor that deserves our sole focus.So why does the press focus so intently on climate change as the root cause? Perhaps for the same reasons I just did in an academic paper about wildfires in Nature, one of the world’s most prestigious journals: it fits a simple storyline that rewards the person telling it. The paper I just published—“Climate warming increases extreme daily wildfire growth risk in California”—focuses exclusively on how climate change has affected extreme wildfire behavior. I knew not to try to quantify key aspects other than climate change in my research because it would dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival, Science, want to tell. This matters because it is critically important for scientists to be published in high-profile journals; in many ways, they are the gatekeepers for career success in academia. And the editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society. To put it bluntly, climate science has become less about understanding the complexities of the world and more about serving as a kind of Cassandra, urgently warning the public about the dangers of climate change. However understandable this instinct may be, it distorts a great deal of climate science research, misinforms the public, and most importantly, makes practical solutions more difficult to achieve.
https://www.thefp.com/p/i-overhyped-cli ... -published
This scientist explains why climate scientists need to lie to get published ......
Idiot ...
now read the original article above .....
before making a fool out of your self again......
9 Sep 2023 8:03 am
Beequeef posted it.Pastafarian » 09 Sep 2023, 6:27 am » wrote: ↑ I’m almost positive this is fake news.
you see, MAG(G)Ats cannot be taken seriously any longer.
This scientist is going to ruin his career and standing by fudging his study? Btw, was it a peer-reviewed study? Probably not either.
Of course it's fake news.
9 Sep 2023 8:09 am
9 Sep 2023 8:10 am
You jealous cuz no one will suck your herpes-riddled dick.
9 Sep 2023 8:12 am
Pastafarian » 09 Sep 2023, 8:10 am » wrote: ↑ You jealous cuz no one will suck your heroes-riddled dick.
your momma does
9 Sep 2023 8:12 am
9 Sep 2023 8:13 am
Biased peer review editors of science journals have destroyed the whole point of the peer review process .....andPastafarian » 09 Sep 2023, 7:59 am » wrote: ↑ No one ever said it was the only factor. But it is a factor.
and this is not a new phenomena ...
The Crisis Of Peer ReviewSpeaking at the Royal Society in London in April, Richard Smith, a former editor of the BMJ, who edited the journal for more than a decade, made the case that pre-publication review was too slow, expensive, and burdensome to reviewers, and “lacking in evidence that it actually works in its chief goal of spotting errors.”He cited an experiment conducted during his time at the BMJ, in which a short paper containing eight deliberate errors was sent to 300 reviewers, as evidence of how badly the system can fail to detect errors.“No one found more than five, the median was two, and 20 percent didn’t spot any,” he was quoted as saying by Times Higher Education. “If peer review was a drug it would never get on the market because we have lots of evidence of its adverse effects and don’t have evidence of its benefit.”Instead of pre-publication vetting by peer review, Smith proposed leaving it to online readers to decide “what matters and what doesn’t.”Also in April Richard Horton, the editor of The Lancet, Britain’s other top medical journal, wrote an editorial pointing out that “much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue” and drew attention to “an obsession among scientists for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance.”He went on to say, “The apparent endemicity of bad research behavior is alarming. In their quest for telling a compelling story, scientists too often sculpt their data to fit their preferred theory of the world.”It’s ironic that Horton presided over one of the worst failures of peer review when, in 1998, his journal published a paper by Andrew Wakefield alleging that vaccination with the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine caused “leaky” intestines and autism in children who received it.The paper, which was based on a mere 12 cases, was reviewed by 6 reviewers, none of whom spotted any of the many causes for concern. In the end it took ten years for an investigative reporter to ferret out the fraud perpetrated by Wakefield and for The Lancet to retract the paper. The effects of this unfortunate lapse are still with us.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffreyka ... c0809e463e
9 Sep 2023 9:30 am
the queen saint of cocksucking
9 Sep 2023 1:48 pm
that's all he's got, well all of em. It's fake news, even when the source is known to be other that the messenger. That and childishly changing posts that he can't refute.Z09 » 09 Sep 2023, 6:46 am » wrote: ↑ Fake news?
That's your favorite line every time you read something you don't like
Anybody over 8th grade education knows the falsehood of changed posts and just laugh at the ineptitude of their ploy.
9 Sep 2023 2:28 pm
Well...he is half right. It was probably caused by humans, just not by climate change. Humans named Oprah.
10 Sep 2023 5:38 am
Stop asking to SUCK MY COCK you perverted POS KNEEGROW!!
Who is online
In total there are 4237 users online :: 2 registered, 12 bots, and 4223 guests
Registered users: Johnny You, LowIQTrash
Bots: DuckDuckBot, Bolt, CriteoBot, proximic, ADmantX, YandexBot, facebookexternalhit, bingbot, Applebot, Mediapartners-Google, Googlebot, curl/7